The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[CJGJ]

"Over to you Brownbear..." CJGJ replies within 10 minutes

CJGJ replies and you respond in 9 mins......hmmmmmmmm

 

 

 

 

PS is the point made incorrect in some way ?....no

Edited May 24, 2017 by CJGJ

[Jamboelite]

Please check the story before posting 'misinformation'

 

Check out of contract rules and regulations..the club has no control over a player who wishes to move. All they can do is get the best deal for themselves.

Yes here he is lets play CJGJ bingo.....

[CJGJ]

Yes here he is lets play CJGJ bingo.....

 

Bingo not a bit too much for you ?....it does involve numbers and you need to be able to mark a card so you might need some help

[franko1874]

Please check the story before posting 'misinformation'

 

Check out of contract rules and regulations..the club has no control over a player who wishes to move. All they can do is get the best deal for themselves.

Didn't realise that, no need to get all defensive though

[CMc]

Song for Rangers:

 

Bye bye, you sectarian shite,

You cheated to your titles then you let your club die.

Now everyone is going to see through your lies.

Saying, "we were there the day that you died"

The day the Rangers died...

Edited May 25, 2017 by CMc

[Strachsuit]

They are certainly rattling through the witness list today with Maclean, Fleming, Gillespie, Holmes, Townsend and Berti so far.  All helped by Findlay not having any questions for Holmes or Townsend.

 

By my calculations, the Crown has only one witness left to call from the 8 he had to call at the end of last week.

 

Edit. - Someone has miscounted

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman

Advocate Depute says he only has two witnesses left, one is Mr Horne, the other is overseas returning on Tuesday

.

 

Only my opinion from a complete outsider looking in (and based on tweets from Doleman and BBC's Henderson) but it hardly seems like the Crown have put together a slam-dunk case against Mr Whyte so far? There have been a lot of avoiding of answers when it comes to signed documents, and whose signature it actually was. Quite hard to follow with those few days without live tweeting but to me this could go either way still. 

[DETTY29]

Only my opinion from a complete outsider looking in (and based on tweets from Doleman and BBC's Henderson) but it hardly seems like the Crown have put together a slam-dunk case against Mr Whyte so far? There have been a lot of avoiding of answers when it comes to signed documents, and whose signature it actually was. Quite hard to follow with those few days without live tweeting but to me this could go either way still.

All these documents on company headed paper, where the signatory can't recall signing or says it isn't their signature, and yet no accusation of who or on whose behalf these have been signed.

 

I suppose prosecution can't prove who has signed and defence doesn't want to go there, so doubt in jury's mind v. damage limitation.

Edited May 25, 2017 by DETTY29

[Hagar the Horrible]

This is the first time any of the crown witnesses have had any input as to what it is exactly Whyte may be guilty of??????  no smoking gun so far  but then this:

 

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 3m3 minutes ago

Horne says Share Purchase Agreement set out Investment Whyte would have to put into the club. Not to do so "a breach of the companies act"

 

Horne says if he had known Whyte was using Ticketus funds to pay the bank debt he would have considered this "illegal financial assistance"

 

 

I was wondering when the AD would come up with something that Whyte did that may be considered against the law, regulations.  Rather than being a dodgy car salesman???

[Footballfirst]

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 14m14 minutes ago

On 5 May 2011 Horne says he received a demand for ?2.8m from HMRC for the "small tax case" to be paid within 30 days.

 

So Rangers lied and Stewart Regan lied when they and he said that the tax bill hadn't "crystallised" by UEFA's licensing deadline of 30 June 2011.

 

Anyone see any potential issues with the award of Rangers UEFA Licence for next season folks?

[Pans Jambo]

 

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 14m14 minutes ago

On 5 May 2011 Horne says he received a demand for ?2.8m from HMRC for the "small tax case" to be paid within 30 days.

 

So Rangers lied and Stewart Regan lied when they and he said that the tax bill hadn't "crystallised" by UEFA's licensing deadline of 30 June 2011.

 

Anyone see any potential issues with the award of Rangers UEFA Licence for next season folks?

 

Nothing to see here...

[DETTY29]

 

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 14m14 minutes ago

 

On 5 May 2011 Horne says he received a demand for ?2.8m from HMRC for the "small tax case" to be paid within 30 days.

 

So Rangers lied and Stewart Regan lied when they and he said that the tax bill hadn't "crystallised" by UEFA's licensing deadline of 30 June 2011.

 

Anyone see any potential issues with the award of Rangers UEFA Licence for next season folks?

The base premise for awarding a license ? Grant Russell* is that all will happen is TRFC will likely be closely monitored and don't need to fund past losses / write off loans etc.

 

Didn't UBIG/UKIO have 2 major share investments to allow us to meet FFP criteria. Needn't have bothered or their liquidators should claim against the SFA.

 

*I'm sure I read a change of tactfrom GR saying the loans could be counted as income to offset losses.

[JamboAl]

 

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 14m14 minutes ago

On 5 May 2011 Horne says he received a demand for ?2.8m from HMRC for the "small tax case" to be paid within 30 days.

 

So Rangers lied and Stewart Regan lied when they and he said that the tax bill hadn't "crystallised" by UEFA's licensing deadline of 30 June 2011.

 

Anyone see any potential issues with the award of Rangers UEFA Licence for next season folks?

 

I'm not sure they necessarily did.

If the demand for ?2.8m was based on estimated figures then there would be a right of appeal meaning that the true figure (crystallised) was still not known.  If it was a final figure then Regan needs to walk.

[kingdannyb]

Horne says in 1993 he joined the Murray Group after answering an advert in the Scotsman.

Horne says he was aware that Murray wanted to dispose of it's share Rangers in 2007/2008.

Murray had invested around ?80m in Rangers and didn't want to invest any more.

Horne says if the "big tax case" had been lost both Murray and Rangers would have been liable.

Horne says Share Purchase Agreement set out Investment Whyte would have to put into the club.

Not to do so "a breach of the companies act"

Horne says if he had known Whyte was using Ticketus funds to pay the bank debt he would have considered this "illegal financial assistance"

Adds that he then wrote to Collyer Bristow for an "explanation"

Asks for copies of any agreement between Whyte and Ticketus to confirm no breach of the Share Purchase Agreement.

Horne says he never received a response.

[Escobar PHM]

Only my opinion from a complete outsider looking in (and based on tweets from Doleman and BBC's Henderson) but it hardly seems like the Crown have put together a slam-dunk case against Mr Whyte so far? There have been a lot of avoiding of answers when it comes to signed documents, and whose signature it actually was. Quite hard to follow with those few days without live tweeting but to me this could go either way still.

Ive been following it too through tweets and various summary reports. I havent seen or read one single piece of evidence being led where you thought, that's its, game set and match to the AD. Findlay has played a blinder muddying waters, steering clear of incriminating stuff and introducing serious doubt about the truthfulness and credibility of most of the major crown witnesses.

 

I expect this case to finish when Findlay presents his 'no case to answer' motion towards the middle of next week at the end of the prosecution evidence. If it doesn't and he has to lead evidence on his clients behalf, strap yourselves in because it'll be explosive.

[N Lincs Jambo]

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 14m14 minutes ago

 

On 5 May 2011 Horne says he received a demand for ?2.8m from HMRC for the "small tax case" to be paid within 30 days.

 

So Rangers lied and Stewart Regan lied when they and he said that the tax bill hadn't "crystallised" by UEFA's licensing deadline of 30 June 2011.

 

Anyone see any potential issues with the award of Rangers UEFA Licence for next season folks?

Strikes me as corruption in favour of one club now attested to under oath in a court of law. Regan has to go and go immediately.

 

As we all know he won't it's now up to the clubs and fans to mobilise as they did 5 years ago and force the issue.

 

We certainly should be doing as we were effectively cheated out of a CL qualifying spot with Scotland still getting 2 at that time.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Don Dan]

Strikes me as corruption in favour of one club now attested to under oath in a court of law. Regan has to go and go immediately.

As we all know he won't it's now up to the clubs and fans to mobilise as they did 5 years ago and force the issue.

We certainly should be doing as we were effectively cheated out of a CL qualifying spot with Scotland still getting 2 at that time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He will either keep quiet and hope nobody notices or offer up weasel words of contrition or more likely obfuscate his and the involvement of the state/sock.

 

SFA/SPFL. That's auto correct for you

Edited May 25, 2017 by Dannie Boy

[jambovambo]

Findlay "Did Ellis and his advisors simply disappear off the radar"

Horne says there was no progress made.

 

Arf

[Footballfirst]

I'm not sure they necessarily did.

If the demand for ?2.8m was based on estimated figures then there would be a right of appeal meaning that the true figure (crystallised) was still not known.  If it was a final figure then Regan needs to walk.

 

I take it you have missed some of the previous evidence on this. Rangers were first offered an opportunity to settle in November 2010, when the bill was ?2.3m. At they same time they were told that they had until 31 Dec 2010 to appeal and also advised to pay something on account to stop interest accruing.

 

They did nothing until February 2011, when "side letters" relating to the WTC were found.  In early March they were advised by their legal counsel to settle the bill on account that it was undefendable because of the side letters and the fact that their existence had been denied.

 

Another ex director Mike McGill said that the bill had "crystallised" at that point in his evidence. 

 

Interest had continue to accrue and the bill had reached ?2.8m by May.

 

Whatever date is the correct one, the bill had cystallised and became "overdue" 30 days after the bill was issued, so should have been advised to both the SFA and UEFA. Rangers should not have been given a licence to play in the CL qualifying in season 2011/12 as a result. 

 

For Rangers, it didn't make a whole lot of difference as they were emptied out following "a day trip to Malmo".  For Celtic and other clubs who were denied European places as as result, there is a case for them claiming damages from the Oldco and the SFA.

 

[Hagar the Horrible]

James Doleman? @jamesdoleman 49m49 minutes ago

 

 

Horne says he is interested in football "but not passionately" Had heard about other Lithuanian owners in Scottish football, thought "oh no"

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry cant think who they mean????

[JamboAl]

I take it you have missed some of the previous evidence on this. Rangers were first offered an opportunity to settle in November 2010, when the bill was ?2.3m. At they same time they were told that they had until 31 Dec 2010 to appeal and also advised to pay something on account to stop interest accruing.

 

They did nothing until February 2011, when "side letters" relating to the WTC were found.  In early March they were advised by their legal counsel to settle the bill on account that it was undefendable because of the side letters and the fact that their existence had been denied.

 

Another ex director Mike McGill said that the bill had "crystallised" at that point in his evidence. 

 

Interest had continue to accrue and the bill had reached ?2.8m by May.

 

Whatever date is the correct one, the bill had cystallised and became "overdue" 30 days after the bill was issued, so should have been advised to both the SFA and UEFA. Rangers should not have been given a licence to play in the CL qualifying in season 2011/12 as a result. 

 

For Rangers, it didn't make a whole lot of difference as they were emptied out following "a day trip to Malmo".  For Celtic and other clubs who were denied European places as as result, there is a case for them claiming damages from the Oldco and the SFA.

 

I obviously haven't followed it too closely and wasn't clear as to whether the Nov 2010 bill was by way of formal assesment. If not then the debt would not have fully crystallised.  If it was by formal assessment and the appeal period had expired, Regan really wants to own up and walk.

[kingdannyb]

Horne "The club was funded and could trade but wasn't making profits, was spending more than it was earning"

 

Findlay; "The problem with the Rangers tax scheme was side letters had been issued."

Horne: "Decision made to re-route salaries made it taxable"

Edited May 25, 2017 by kingdannyb

[kingdannyb]

Findlay moves on to big tax case, Horne said EBT scheme began in 2001, applied to executives across the group.

Hoare says 85% of the EBT's were issued to Rangers, 15% to rest of Murray Group.

Says liability was "lots of millions of pounds"

Findlay on big tax case "Murray was looking at Rangers saying 'That's your problem not ours'"

[Footballfirst]

I obviously haven't followed it too closely and wasn't clear as to whether the Nov 2010 bill was by way of formal assesment. If not then the debt would not have fully crystallised.  If it was by formal assessment and the appeal period had expired, Regan really wants to own up and walk.

 

Here is this afternoon's exchange on the subject with Murray Group's lawyer David Horne.  Financial planning Rangers style.

 

Findlay moves on to the small tax case, asks what steps Horne took about it? Witness says he took advice about it

Findlay; the problem with the Rangers tax scheme was side letters had been issued Horne decision made to re-route salaries made it taxable

Letter 26 Nov 2010 from HMRC to Murray Group on small tax case Asks for reply on liability by 31 Dec

Continues "Additional documents have came to light," encloses copy of these, Total liability?, ? 2,238,550. Adds "interest is running"

Horne agrees he received a copy of the HMRC letter

Horne says HMRC had got a positive decision in a similar case, and were saying "now is the time to pay up"

Findlay asks if "side letters" were given to HMRC or had been found by them? Horne says found by HMRC as result of "big tax case,"

Findlay says final bill was ?2.8m "how did this happen" Horne says he thinks "club didn't have the money to pay it at the time"

Adds, they also sought a legal opinion. Findlay: bill increasing on a daily basis, why did this take so long? Horne, issue for RFC board

Findlay notes meeting with counsel was 24 Feb 2011, "Why on earth did it take so long" Horne says he is not entirely sure 1/2

Findlay: took from Nov 2010 to 24 Feb 2011 to meet a QC to be told "Pay up or reach a settlement?"

Horne says he believed the club didn't have the funds to meet the bill.

Findlay: It was decided to do nothing and let the new owner pay the bill?" Horne "Effectively yes" DF "?2.2,m allowed to become ?2.8m"

If Whyte deal fell through who would pay? Horne says bank of Scotland as "wouldn't wanted to see Rangers go bust on their watch"

Findlay "So much for robust financial planning"

Findlay " the bank might step in due to bad publicity if Rangers went bust? Horne agrees "What would Murray do about the had publicity?"

Horne says the bank would have to agree to any fund injection Findlay "You want to sell the first chance you get" Horne: We did

[Hagar the Horrible]

So its clear Rangers old version never had the wherewithall to pay their tax liabilities as per the Wee Tax Case which was growing with interest every month, yet the SFA knew this and still granted them a licelce at some other clubs expense so they could get pumped out by Malmo. 

 

So can we agree if Dual Contract turned out not to be sporting advantage, i.e a bill likely to cause extinction..so far.  into the ?millions????  I find it incredulous that the SFA ingoned not even paying a pidly wee amount in comparison, should be reason enough to impose sanctions???//  Our member clubs should fgrow a massive pair of lady balls and ask tor an explanation????

 

SFA not fit for purpose, just there to pander to the OF

[Jambo-Jimbo]

So its clear Rangers old version never had the wherewithall to pay their tax liabilities as per the Wee Tax Case which was growing with interest every month, yet the SFA knew this and still granted them a licelce at some other clubs expense so they could get pumped out by Malmo. 

 

So can we agree if Dual Contract turned out not to be sporting advantage, i.e a bill likely to cause extinction..so far.  into the ?millions????  I find it incredulous that the SFA ingoned not even paying a pidly wee amount in comparison, should be reason enough to impose sanctions???//  Our member clubs should fgrow a massive pair of lady balls and ask tor an explanation????

 

SFA not fit for purpose, just there to pander to the OF

 

Hasn't that been the case for the past 129 years?

[cannonfoda]

"Horne says he believed the club didn't have the funds to meet the bill".

 

Is this not the equivalent of trading whilst insolvent?  Thought this was illegal?

 

How can we get our game back? We've made massive changes to our club to make it accountable to us the "owners" however what's the point if the league is corrupt?  Actually think that every other club outside of the two ar$e cheeks  in the league should just draw straws at the start of the season and whoever wins the draw should be allowed to win the league - fix the games if needed  -it wouldn't be any more corrupt than it is now!

 

Anyway - back to asking (in hope) .... are they deid yet?

[JamboAl]

Here is this afternoon's exchange on the subject with Murray Group's lawyer David Horne.  Financial planning Rangers style.

 

Findlay moves on to the small tax case, asks what steps Horne took about it? Witness says he took advice about it

Findlay; the problem with the Rangers tax scheme was side letters had been issued Horne decision made to re-route salaries made it taxable

Letter 26 Nov 2010 from HMRC to Murray Group on small tax case Asks for reply on liability by 31 Dec

Continues "Additional documents have came to light," encloses copy of these, Total liability?, ? 2,238,550. Adds "interest is running"

Horne agrees he received a copy of the HMRC letter

Horne says HMRC had got a positive decision in a similar case, and were saying "now is the time to pay up"

Findlay asks if "side letters" were given to HMRC or had been found by them? Horne says found by HMRC as result of "big tax case,"

Findlay says final bill was ?2.8m "how did this happen" Horne says he thinks "club didn't have the money to pay it at the time"

Adds, they also sought a legal opinion. Findlay: bill increasing on a daily basis, why did this take so long? Horne, issue for RFC board

Findlay notes meeting with counsel was 24 Feb 2011, "Why on earth did it take so long" Horne says he is not entirely sure 1/2

Findlay: took from Nov 2010 to 24 Feb 2011 to meet a QC to be told "Pay up or reach a settlement?"

Horne says he believed the club didn't have the funds to meet the bill.

Findlay: It was decided to do nothing and let the new owner pay the bill?" Horne "Effectively yes" DF "?2.2,m allowed to become ?2.8m"

If Whyte deal fell through who would pay? Horne says bank of Scotland as "wouldn't wanted to see Rangers go bust on their watch"

Findlay "So much for robust financial planning"

Findlay " the bank might step in due to bad publicity if Rangers went bust? Horne agrees "What would Murray do about the had publicity?"

Horne says the bank would have to agree to any fund injection Findlay "You want to sell the first chance you get" Horne: We did

I'm geting a little confused here FF

 

Letter 26 Nov 2010 from HMRC to Murray Group on small tax case Asks for reply on liability by 31 Dec

 

This suggests that it was not an assessment at that point but that the parties were attempting to reach a negotiated settlement  including interest which of course was rising daily.  Is that right?

[Mikey1874]

So its clear Rangers old version never had the wherewithall to pay their tax liabilities as per the Wee Tax Case which was growing with interest every month, yet the SFA knew this and still granted them a licelce at some other clubs expense so they could get pumped out by Malmo.

 

So can we agree if Dual Contract turned out not to be sporting advantage, i.e a bill likely to cause extinction..so far. into the ?millions???? I find it incredulous that the SFA ingoned not even paying a pidly wee amount in comparison, should be reason enough to impose sanctions???// Our member clubs should fgrow a massive pair of lady balls and ask tor an explanation????

 

SFA not fit for purpose, just there to pander to the OF

Worse than other cases say the Hearts transfer ban.

 

Authorities have gone all in to protect Rangers for the good of Scottish society. Not going to change now.

 

However there will be a fallout of some sort.

[Don Dan]

Worse than other cases say the Hearts transfer ban.

 

Authorities have gone all in to protect Rangers for the good of Scottish society. Not going to change now.

 

However there will be a fallout of some sort.

Lets hope so. However it won't be SFA or the SPFL who instigate it. The MSM might report it but won't ask questions. It will be down to the other Clubs or fan pressure to start the ball rolling. The evidence is there as far a as I can see irrefutable. 

Edited May 25, 2017 by Dannie Boy

[buzzbomb1958]

So its clear Rangers old version never had the wherewithall to pay their tax liabilities as per the Wee Tax Case which was growing with interest every month, yet the SFA knew this and still granted them a licelce at some other clubs expense so they could get pumped out by Malmo.

 

So can we agree if Dual Contract turned out not to be sporting advantage, i.e a bill likely to cause extinction..so far. into the ?millions???? I find it incredulous that the SFA ingoned not even paying a pidly wee amount in comparison, should be reason enough to impose sanctions???// Our member clubs should fgrow a massive pair of lady balls and ask tor an explanation????

 

SFA not fit for purpose, just there to pander to the OF

Ask Regan cos I just have .I will get no answer he should be hounded out of office and not just him

[Mikey1874]

I do wonder if financial cases are more tricky.

 

What might seem am open and shut case after today's evidence is clouded by all the doubt and mis-perception.

[Don Dan]

Regan was either complicit or incompetent or both. He needs to go. 

[Footballfirst]

I'm geting a little confused here FF

 

Letter 26 Nov 2010 from HMRC to Murray Group on small tax case Asks for reply on liability by 31 Dec

 

This suggests that it was not an assessment at that point but that the parties were attempting to reach a negotiated settlement  including interest which of course was rising daily.  Is that right?

I haven't seen the letter of 26 November 2010, although I have seen copies of some later correspondence that refers to the letter of that date.

 

However, I was in court when the letter of 26 November was first shown to the court.  It was an offer to settle in the same terms as Aberdeen Asset Management (who operated a similar scheme). AAM had lost their appeal to a FTTT in October 2010. The offer was to settle on a figure of ?2.2m with a decision on acceptance or appeal by 31 December 2010.

 

Here are James Doleman's tweets when it was raised with Donald McIntyre (RFC's Finance Director):.

Court being shown a letter from HMRC to Murray group from 2010. In it HMRC say the consider tax due on the RFC "discount option scheme"

Letter continues "PAYE and NIC were payable in full...Will litigate all scheme users"

Letter continues by advising Rangers to contact the company "that sold you the scheme" and speak to their auditors about liability

Findlay suggests "HMRC were coming for the club and were after blood" "Yes" McIntyre replies

Total HMRC seeking was ?2,238,559.91

Letter also notes interest was accruing on unpaid balance to HMRC as no payments had been made

Tore Andre Flo received shares after he left Rangers according to the HMRC letter

Craig Moore and Ronald De-Boer also mentioned in HMRC letter.

Letter dated 26 November 2010, McIntyre confirmed Rangers accepted liability as there was a "side letter" Last Stacey asks relevance

Findlay says is vital to the defence

Findlay agrees "this is not a public inquiry it is a trial " Lady Stacey accepts his statement

McIntyre says side letter was presented to him at a meeting with HMRC. Left with "no choice but to accept liability"

McIntyre asked if any payment made to HMRC, says there was not, a decision made by the Murray Group

Findlay suggests "the liability was just left lying around in the hope someone else would pay it."

McIntyre says "I wasn't aware of it either" Findlay "and you were Rangers' finance director"? McIntyre, "yes"

Findlay notes not paying tax bill cost over ?500k in interest.

 

 

...... and further tweets re Mike McGill's evidence.

McGill email "We need to ensure the purchaser doesn't get any surprises..I think we need to front up on the small tax case"

McGill says the case had only recently went from a potential liability and had not "crystallised" until recently Dated 17 March 2011

 

 

Note these contradictory tweets

McIntyre asked if any payment made to HMRC, says there was not, a decision made by the Murray Group

.... and

Adds, they also sought a legal opinion. Findlay: bill increasing on a daily basis, why did this take so long? Horne, issue for RFC board

 

So who took the decision not to pay anything ...... RFC or Murray Group

Edited May 25, 2017 by Footballfirst

[Mikey1874]

Findlay angling for case dismissed on technicalities relating to wrongdoing by sellers?

[PeterintheRain]

Findlay angling for case dismissed on technicalities relating to wrongdoing by sellers?

 

Sir Findlay of Donald is angling to show just how corrupt Sir Minty was. Just how much trouble old dead rangers were in before Mr, wealth off the radar, turned up.  Proving in court what we've always said about the corruption in the GFA(gtf) as they tried to keep rangers alive.

 

Long since time for the GFA to be closed down. Start a new organisation without the Glasgow bias and with no arse cheeks involved.

[buzzbomb1958]

Sir Findlay of Donald is angling to show just how corrupt Sir Minty was. Just how much trouble old dead rangers were in before Mr, wealth off the radar, turned up. Proving in court what we've always said about the corruption in the GFA(gtf) as they tried to keep rangers alive.

 

Long since time for the GFA to be closed down. Start a new organisation without the Glasgow bias and with no arse cheeks involved.

It would take everyone to ask the questions in the press and all supporters clubs to email sfa before anything to get these crooked parasites out of Hampden,Regan and co know if the wrong decision comes out of this trial they will be cannon fodder effin crooks everyone of them

[jambovambo]

Horne says he can't recall if he told Whyte about a meeting he had with HMRC 5 days before the deal completed

 

Adds that Whyte didn't pay the revenue at completion because he wanted to appeal judgment

 

Doleman

[kingdannyb]

Findlay opens by showing the court a minute of a conference call, 31 May 2010. Participants, McGill, Horne, Bain and Alistair Johnston.

Call was to discuss the "big tax case"

"group and the club are being targeted by the revenue.. speculation..an anti-RFC sentiment amongst HMRC individuals.

[kingdannyb]

Horne says the legal advice he was receiving was that the club would win it's case.

Agrees that insolvency was not the "legacy" Murray would want to leave at Rangers

Horne "No-one was going to hide anything, not appropriate to disclose at this time."

Adds information given to Whyte team later.

RFC chairman Alistair Johnston wanted more spent on players to ensure season ticket sales, but Lloyds would not "support the strategy"

Horne says Alistair Johnston wanted to put the sale "on hold" until the end of the season but his request was rejected by Murray.

Agrees one reason for not delaying sale was the possibility Whyte would walk away or refuse to pay liability for small tax case.

[kingdannyb]

Adds that Whyte didn't pay the revenue at completion because he wanted to appeal judgment.

 

Findlay: Murray needed to sell Rangers, was going to sell to Whyte whatever happened.

Horne "The deal was acceptable to the Murray Group"

 

Findlay asks Horne about due diligence Murray carried out on Whyte.

Horne "Not very much, nothing. We did searches on the internet"

Edited May 26, 2017 by kingdannyb

[jambovambo]

You were prepared to pay PWC to produce glossy brochures, how much did you spend doing due diligence on Whyte

Horne "Not very much, nothing"

[kingdannyb]

AD shows Horne an email, from Gary Withey April 2011, CC'd to "David Fraser" who, he says, is David Murray.

[Rods]

Findlay is ragdolling this boy. I am beginning to think it will be over soon and not guilty.

[Hagar the Horrible]

AD shows Horne an email, from Gary Withey April 2011, CC'd to "David Fraser" who, he says, is David Murray.

So to hide yourself in an email chain, SDM had an alias of David Fraser?......hmmmmm So SDM did know things?  i hope the email states something SDM denied in court???

 

No due diligence done on CW, yet they did on other suitors...again hmmmm  did they already know what Craigy Boy was???  is????

 

Findley and the last lawyer have a right ding dong at each others skill sets,  getting a bit personal.  Tuesday will see that last crown witness,  that should be interesting?  will DF bring in witnesses for the defence?

 

Has anybody brough in Ticketus yet and ask one simple question....WTF?

[Don Dan]

"group and the club are being targeted by the revenue.. speculation..an anti-RFC sentiment amongst HMRC individuals"

 

Away bile yer heed. Anti Rangers sentiment they want the tax you lot were evading for the good of the country, you know the one that flys the Union Flag that's forever visible at Ibrox and the away support that follows you.

[DETTY29]

"group and the club are being targeted by the revenue.. speculation..an anti-RFC sentiment amongst HMRC individuals"

 

Away bile yer heed. Anti Rangers sentiment they want the tax you lot were evading for the good of the country, you know the one that flys the Union Flag that's forever visible at Ibrox and the away support that follows you.

It's pathetic isn't it?

 

Bit like Salmond bent over backwards to intervene for Hearts but did nothing for Rangers crap they spout.

[Hagar the Horrible]

"group and the club are being targeted by the revenue.. speculation..an anti-RFC sentiment amongst HMRC individuals"

 

Away bile yer heed. Anti Rangers sentiment they want the tax you lot were evading for the good of the country, you know the one that flys the Union Flag that's forever visible at Ibrox and the away support that follows you.

They were actualy sudgesting their tax avoidance scheme hidden from Hector and the Football authorities are all some Timmy conspiracy from inside HMRC????  Nobody made then use an avoidance scheme(TBC in courts if Evasion)???  Does HMRC now stand for Her Majesties Roman Caffliks????

[Don Dan]

They were actualy sudgesting their tax avoidance scheme hidden from Hector and the Football authorities are all some Timmy conspiracy from inside HMRC???? Nobody made then use an avoidance scheme(TBC in courts if Evasion)??? Does HMRC now stand for Her Majesties Roman Caffliks????

I like it (the last bit) [emoji23]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DETTY29]

They were actualy sudgesting their tax avoidance scheme hidden from Hector and the Football authorities are all some Timmy conspiracy from inside HMRC???? Nobody made then use an avoidance scheme(TBC in courts if Evasion)??? Does HMRC now stand for Her Majesties Roman Caffliks????

HMRC negotiated with a number of EPL clubs although I'm not sure to what extent of any discounting and repayment terms.

 

Murray offered ?10m on a base ?24m bill after MG/RFC lied on the existence of side letters.

 

Hearts agreed a ?1.8m bill v. ?1.4m base bill over 3 years, with no accusations from HMRC of the club being obstructive.

 

One of my mates got a ?9k bill and was allowed 2 years to repay.

 

Whyte offered ?5m per annum on all outstanding taxes. Even Tickets would have said to him 'You're gonna need a bigger stadium'

[Footballfirst]

I love a bit of Lawyer v Lawyer banter

 

Court shown email from Horne, 28 Feb 2011, "The ISC is able to do it's own DD" Horne We were comfortable with Whyte's advisers

Findlay suggests notes show Horne knew in Nov 2010 Whyte was in contact with Octopus re a ?15m loan facility. 1/2

Horne "That would appear to be the case" Adds thought was just for working capital 2/2

Findlay asks if Horne asked Whyte about Octopus? Horne "We weren't aware"

Horne, "You can't read the share purchase agreement in isolation from other documents Mr Findlay"

Horne, there was a binding undertaking Findlay "Any contract can be broken Mr Horne"

Findlay "Are you seriously suggesting you signed a contract without a remedy if it was broken?" Horne "You are a criminal lawyer Mr Findlay"

Adds "Not a corporate lawyer" Findlay "Discourtesy doesn't help" Horne "Don't take it personally Mr Findlay" Judge intervenes"

Lady Stacey "We have to listen to this, discourtesy doesn't help anyone"

 

 

That's it until Tuesday when the Crown will call their last witness. He/She is coming from overseas, so in theory could be Johnston, King, or someone else who has just been or holiday or doing business out the country.